1

Creating and sustaining a behavioural change in energy conservation –The role of Foundations

byStéphanie A. Jacometti

IntroductionWhile the production and use of energy is integral to daily life, it inevitably impacts

the environment and draws on scarce resources. In the last thirty years, energy efficiencyand energy conservation have been seen as an increasingly important way to reduce energyuse. Campaigns that have sought to address demand have so far concentrated on raisingawareness and providing information, but this has not changed behaviour significantly. Forexample, the UK Government has tried to change behaviour by taking a generalised, mass-marketing approach which appears to have had little significant impact. Foundations andNGOs may, however, be better placed to change behaviour, as they have longer timehorizons, are better positioned to take certain kinds of risks and are sometimes betterresourced to start or finance a programme.

Aim of the researchThe overall aim of this thesis was to analyse what elements of a programme could

change energy-using behaviour in the long term, and to explore whether and how aFoundation might develop and evaluate such a programme. Specific objectives included:

To understand the behavioural change process.

To understand why people change their behaviour.

To analyse where past programmes, be they education or behavioural change ones,have gone wrong and what can be learned from them.

To analyse whether and how Foundations might be particularly well placed tosponsor a behavioural change programme, compared to government initiatives.

Research methodsA critical literature review of journal articles and reports, including a focus on the

psychology of behavioural change, revealed relatively little information about behaviouralchange programmes specifically sponsored by Foundations. Consequently, the informationneeded had to be gathered through interviews. Sixteen semi-structured interviews wereconducted, both with people and organisations that had experience with behavioural changeprogrammes and that worked on the funding side.

The behavioural change process and campaignsThe research reviewed shows that knowledge does not always lead to attitudinal

change nor does a change in attitude always lead to behavioural change. Therefore,providing information and changing attitudes will most likely not lead to a change inbehaviour. The main focus of most of the campaigns carried out by the UK Government hasbeen to raise awareness and inform the audience, which has been largely unsuccessful inchanging behaviour.

2

Behaviour change campaigns are more resource intensive than awareness-raisingcampaigns, but are more effective. With limited resources, two approaches can be taken:personalised and time intensive or time “extensive” and generalised. Unfortunately, thelatter is used most often, although it tends to be less effective.

Several factors have been shown to be effective in encouraging people to changetheir behaviour. These include feedback, prompts, personalised advice and collective action.Collective action, or community support, is especially important when people learn thatothers are doing their bit and, as a result, may want to emulate those in their directenvironment.

The EcoTeams programme run by a charity, Global Action Plan, integrates a number ofthese factors, such as a group setting, material and feedback, in the form of measuring andmonitoring. Rather than discussing radical measures to save energy, the EcoTeams programmefocuses on no- or low-cost practices, which can become habits and - eventually - routines.Research by the University of East Anglia found that after participating in the EcoTeamsprogramme, participants were more likely to install high cost measures.

ResultsThe primary data collected showed that Foundations focused more on policy and

lobbying than behavioural change programmes when asked how high changing behaviourwas on their agenda. According to those working for Foundations, cost effectiveness, qualityof its content and timeframe are important criteria when selecting a programme.

Those who carried out programmes encountered a number of overlapping obstacles.These included time-constrained participants, gaining trust from people, difficult to reachtarget audiences and the expectations of funders. When asked what key lessons intervieweeslearned during the design, implementation and evaluation of the programmes, answersdiffered considerably as did the programmes. However, interviewees felt that it wasimportant, during the implementation stage, to engage with partners and have a veryspecific aim. For the evaluation stage, the following methods to gauge the outcomes werementioned: CO2 as a measurement, qualitative data, external evaluators and feedback in theform of surveys filled out by participants.

In order to complement behavioural change programmes, a number of intervieweessuggested rewarding good behaviour by investing in something that would benefit thewhole community, such as a park. It was also felt that energy advice services should bepersonalised so that individuals would not be burdened with excess and unwantedinformation.

Both groups were asked what they felt was the most successful behaviouralchange/education programme. Policy actions such as the Carbon Emissions ReductionTargets and boiler legislation were mentioned, as well as behavioural change programmessuch as the EcoTeams programme. The energy advice network run by the Energy Saving Trustand school programmes were also highlighted.

It was felt that education and information are necessary but not sufficient to changebehaviour. Interviewees believed that while the government is responsible for changingbehaviour, the community also plays a crucial role. Both published reports and the primaryresearch concluded that the government needs to take the lead with regard to changingbehaviour in energy conservation.

ConclusionsThe following conclusions can be drawn from the primary and secondary data.

Advice and information are often used interchangeably but there is a distinct difference.

3

Advice is personalised, whereas information is of a more general nature. Both the messageand the messenger are important; the message should be clear and consistent, and ideallyshould come from a trusted source such as friends or family. Important success factorsinclude providing feedback and focusing on communities. Furthermore, many of theinterviewees felt that a forum is needed to bring all the stakeholders together so that there isan opportunity to collaborate. This would also increase the likelihood that the message sentto individuals is consistent. School education was also seen as important so that youngpeople can grow up with energy conservation, while becoming more environmentallyaware. Although it may take time before the results of a change in behaviour are felt, it isimportant to work simultaneously on policy and behaviour, i.e. top-down as well as bottom-up, so a reduction in energy use is likely to materialize significantly faster.

Foundations are well positioned to achieve changes in the way in which we useenergy since they can take more risks over longer timescales than government initiatives.However, Foundations find it difficult to select the most effective programmes. Thismanifests itself in the small amount of funding by Foundations in the UK going towardsenvironmental charities.

RecommendationsThe following recommendations can be made from the research. National campaigns

usually last a short period of time and are often ineffective in changing behaviour. Thecommunity-focused EcoTeams programme only lasts six months and is carried out on asmaller scale, but has been proven to be effective. A far-reaching campaign should probablylast a number of years using multiple communication channels, including media and one-to-one approaches.

Government organisations, Foundations and NGOs have different strengths andweaknesses. A strategy that builds upon the particular strengths of these organisations,focused on effective behavioural change, could be made up of three stages. The first stage ofsuch a strategy would involve the government raising awareness and providing individualswith information about a programme. The second stage would be carried out byFoundations providing the funding for charities that could change behaviour. The thirdstage would involve charities changing the behaviour of individuals, with the governmentbacking up their efforts with policy if necessary.

Evaluating a programme in order to gauge its effectiveness is very important but isoften not carried out thoroughly. The EcoTeams programme is an exception, with numerousstudies focussing on its outcomes. Funds are often available for quantitative analysis but notqualitative, as the latter is more resource intensive. Foundations could support NGOs insuch evaluation activities, through both financial resources and expertise. Such evidence andevaluation would make it easier to determine which programmes are demonstrablysuccessful in changing behaviour.